jb wrote:What I read and believe Peeker to be writing is that roles trump all. He's suggesting that at this juncture of a season the die is caste and you can't make a change to closer even though Perez is blowing up. Players can't roll with those changes and it is too disruptive. The conclusion I read is that it is better to take your chances with an unstable closer than to make a change. I disagree. I've explained why.

Anytime you want to put the wheels back on the wagon to a discussion your move, sir.

What I think you're missing about Peeker's post is that the Indians have one closer on the team. Chris Perez is that guy. Nobody else would appear equipped to be the closer.

Technically Bourne is the only CF on the team. The last couple games he hasn't been the center fielder because he was hurt. While it's not the best case scenario others have filled in.

Perez is hurt whether or not it's a physical injury. While it's not best case you don't keep on playing someone that's hurt.

Technically, no he is not. Both Stubbs and Brantley have a shitload of games atthe position. And it makes no difference.

If CP has to go (and I still don't think he will) then it needs to be either Carrasco or a guy that ain't making the ALDS starting rotation should they get there.

Because, JB's scarecrow fillibustering aside, I don't give a shit about Perez and have no desire to see him keep a job he's struggling with. I just think he's still the best guy for it. Mostly because he might not struggle next time out and because it has a domino affect if replace him from within the bullpen ranks.

I'd rather fillabuster than dig in on a position that a guy with a 2.46 WHIP in September in 10 appearances "might not struggle" the next time out than consider alternatives such as match up managing in the 9th.

But hey, he's only 470 out of 509 this month in WHIP, so he's got that going for him. Which is nice.

jb wrote:* I go with the latter and think it is the perfectly logical alternative rather than something to be shit on without thoughtful discussion...

Says the guy who walks into the fucking room with his pants down looking for the punchbowl.

"You guys are nuts.

Like it or not, CP is the guy."

Yeah... because, of the last 60 posts as to why... And I also said in that very post:

You wanna throw a name in the ring then I'd look at Salazar. But I still don't see CP NOT being the guy Tito goes to the rest of the year, however long that may be.

I don't want the guy fucking shit up any more than anyone else. But Tito needs to figure out if he's good to go or not and if he's not you're gonna be messing with the roles and comfort levels of a handful of guys.

I'm done. You feel free to continue to patch yourself up an argument by telling us you said something different than what ya wrote and by only partially telling me what is sitting right there where I wrote it.

jb wrote:* I go with the latter and think it is the perfectly logical alternative rather than something to be shit on without thoughtful discussion...

Says the guy who walks into the fucking room with his pants down looking for the punchbowl.

"You guys are nuts.

Like it or not, CP is the guy."

Yeah... because, of the last 60 posts as to why... And I also said in that very post:

You wanna throw a name in the ring then I'd look at Salazar. But I still don't see CP NOT being the guy Tito goes to the rest of the year, however long that may be.

I don't want the guy fucking shit up any more than anyone else. But Tito needs to figure out if he's good to go or not and if he's not you're gonna be messing with the roles and comfort levels of a handful of guys.

I'm done. You feel free to continue to patch yourself up an argument by telling us you said something different than what ya wrote and by only partially telling me what is sitting right there where I wrote it.

jb wrote:* I go with the latter and think it is the perfectly logical alternative rather than something to be shit on without thoughtful discussion...

Says the guy who walks into the fucking room with his pants down looking for the punchbowl.

"You guys are nuts.

Like it or not, CP is the guy."

Yeah... because, of the last 60 posts as to why... And I also said in that very post:

You wanna throw a name in the ring then I'd look at Salazar. But I still don't see CP NOT being the guy Tito goes to the rest of the year, however long that may be.

I don't want the guy fucking shit up any more than anyone else. But Tito needs to figure out if he's good to go or not and if he's not you're gonna be messing with the roles and comfort levels of a handful of guys.

I'm done. You feel free to continue to patch yourself up an argument by telling us you said something different than what ya wrote and by only partially telling me what is sitting right there where I wrote it.

FUDU wrote:JB I think you're arguing the point I stand for, which is if a guy can get people out (and/or happens to be hot, as it can obviously help) then he can close, as the role of closer is X (X containing some subtle variations). I just don't think right now you're doing a good job of making yourself clear, matter of fact you've been in a funk about making yourself clear for weeks... Maybe it's your diet or maybe you're not posting at your target heart rate. :shrug

Realy not what I'm saying at all.

Maybe I need to write in bullet format like as if this is work? ;-)

* All things being equal and productive, roles = good.

* Roles do not trump performance.

* Performance is always measureable in MLB.

* The only variable to that statement is relevancy of sample size and recency.

* The mystique of the Closer as some sort of valuable commodity is overrated. In most cases, any given schmuck who is effective for one inning can fill the role. I thought that was pretty much understood as a given in this day and age now that there's no mystery to SABRmetrics' baseball and it's about as revolutionary as Gallileo's theories. I can't even believe that discussion would be in play. Not sure it is, FUDU.

* Chris Perez needs to be replaced, stat. He blows so bad even he knows it. I'm just talking right now when it matters most. Not saying he can never correct. having established that, the declarative statement "Like it or not, Chris Perez is the closer" is not the best option. On the contrary, it is unacceptable.

* Preferred logical option one: Find a reliever who can replace him. It it brings us kumbayah, "fill the role of closer".

* I believe I am reading Adam opine something along the lines of the refrane from David Lee Roth crooning Just a Giggalo, "Dude, you haven't been following this season. We t'aint't got nobody". I do not claim to take umbridge with Adam's opinion here, let alone Tito & Micky's.

* I do not believe you take your most valuable 1 starter off rehab and chuck him in that role. I doubt effectiveness and you're messing with 2014.

* Closer by committee of match up pitchers is not the optimal option. You wouldn't plan a season doing that. But if it is true there's no one else, your choice is Chris Perez or 9th inning by managing a match-up committee.

* I go with the latter and think it is the perfectly logical alternative rather than something to be shit on without thoughtful discussion due to folk lore that it can't be done in this situation.

How's that, FUDU? Pass the RIF test?

So what I'm reading from you is akin to the franchise QB thingy. IOW if anyone can they should close out games UNTIL you find the next Holy Grail closer.

That's fine with me, as I'm more in your camp than against it. I have no use for Perez, he's a product of the era of baseball he resides in. He's just not very dominant at it. I look at the role of closer as insignificant when comprehensively looking at the game. Entering the ninth inning the probability of winning is extremely high to engage in all the extra BS surrounding the issue is complicating the issue IMO.

I subscribe to theory that the future of MLB pitching is eventually going to be turned upside down. No roles, no nothing, 12 guys, a few pitching 2-3 innings a game... b/c of arm stress and economics.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:JB I think you're arguing the point I stand for, which is if a guy can get people out (and/or happens to be hot, as it can obviously help) then he can close, as the role of closer is X (X containing some subtle variations). I just don't think right now you're doing a good job of making yourself clear, matter of fact you've been in a funk about making yourself clear for weeks... Maybe it's your diet or maybe you're not posting at your target heart rate. :shrug

Realy not what I'm saying at all.

Maybe I need to write in bullet format like as if this is work? ;-)

* All things being equal and productive, roles = good.

* Roles do not trump performance.

* Performance is always measureable in MLB.

* The only variable to that statement is relevancy of sample size and recency.

* The mystique of the Closer as some sort of valuable commodity is overrated. In most cases, any given schmuck who is effective for one inning can fill the role. I thought that was pretty much understood as a given in this day and age now that there's no mystery to SABRmetrics' baseball and it's about as revolutionary as Gallileo's theories. I can't even believe that discussion would be in play. Not sure it is, FUDU.

* Chris Perez needs to be replaced, stat. He blows so bad even he knows it. I'm just talking right now when it matters most. Not saying he can never correct. having established that, the declarative statement "Like it or not, Chris Perez is the closer" is not the best option. On the contrary, it is unacceptable.

* Preferred logical option one: Find a reliever who can replace him. It it brings us kumbayah, "fill the role of closer".

* I believe I am reading Adam opine something along the lines of the refrane from David Lee Roth crooning Just a Giggalo, "Dude, you haven't been following this season. We t'aint't got nobody". I do not claim to take umbridge with Adam's opinion here, let alone Tito & Micky's.

* I do not believe you take your most valuable 1 starter off rehab and chuck him in that role. I doubt effectiveness and you're messing with 2014.

* Closer by committee of match up pitchers is not the optimal option. You wouldn't plan a season doing that. But if it is true there's no one else, your choice is Chris Perez or 9th inning by managing a match-up committee.

* I go with the latter and think it is the perfectly logical alternative rather than something to be shit on without thoughtful discussion due to folk lore that it can't be done in this situation.

How's that, FUDU? Pass the RIF test?

So what I'm reading from you is akin to the franchise QB thingy. IOW if anyone can they should close out games UNTIL you find the next Holy Grail closer.

That's fine with me, as I'm more in your camp than against it. I have no use for Perez, he's a product of the era of baseball he resides in. He's just not very dominant at it. I look at the role of closer as insignificant when comprehensively looking at the game. Entering the ninth inning the probability of winning is extremely high to engage in all the extra BS surrounding the issue is complicating the issue IMO.

I subscribe to theory that the future of MLB pitching is eventually going to be turned upside down. No roles, no nothing, 12 guys, a few pitching 2-3 innings a game... b/c of arm stress and economics.

I think that for all the BS surrounding him CP has been a hell of a closer with all that does and does not entail.

FUDU wrote:Entering the ninth inning the probability of winning is extremely high to engage in all the extra BS surrounding the issue is complicating the issue IMO.

Which brings up a point I found completely unbelievable today.

The Indians entered the 9th yesterday with a win expectancy percentage of 99.1%. When Chris Perez left the game after his blow-up, the Indians win expectancy was 94.9%. It got as low as 82.2% after Smith walked Colabello to put 1B and 2B with 2 out.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

You guys can laugh at this all you want, but the guy I want to see closing is Josh Tomlin. Fucker ONLY throws strikes and he has that "bulldog" focus. And we all know how tough he is. Plus, how many relievers throw 5 pitches for strikes? AND NOBODY HAS SEEN HIM THIS YEAR.

Sure he might not strike out the side, but put in your best defense and let him loose.

bookelly wrote:You guys can laugh at this all you want, but the guy I want to see closing is Josh Tomlin. Fucker ONLY throws strikes and he has that "bulldog" focus. And we all know how tough he is. Plus, how many relievers throw 5 pitches for strikes? AND NOBODY HAS SEEN HIM THIS YEAR.

Sure he might not strike out the side, but put in your best defense and let him loose.

I'm down, mark me down.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

bookelly wrote:You guys can laugh at this all you want, but the guy I want to see closing is Josh Tomlin. Fucker ONLY throws strikes and he has that "bulldog" focus. And we all know how tough he is. Plus, how many relievers throw 5 pitches for strikes? AND NOBODY HAS SEEN HIM THIS YEAR.

Sure he might not strike out the side, but put in your best defense and let him loose.

I'm down, mark me down.

Lotta funny things in this thread.

None more than this.

The "Nobody's seen him" card is great for young guys with the stuff of a playa. The guy with pedestrian stuff that can't hit 90 - they can hearken back to college ball to remember how to hit that.

So. to be clear, we want a guy who doesn't miss bats, (which history tells us is important in the post season - ask Maddux and Glavine why they don't hold a candle to Smoltz in the PS), that hasn't pitched all year, that's never been in the role, that makes zero hitters uncomfotable in the box...this is the guy you want in the ninth? Mine as well give the hitter a box of cookies as well.

A high Chris Perez throwing lefty would be a better option.

"Rely on defense" and "hope like hell the line drive goes at somebody" are the same thing.

There it is, a little late but present none the less, the "you gotta be a playa" take from Lead. Sometimes I think he thinks he sayin something slick to a can of oil. Christ I think I've heard that take more than I have heard the 12 Days of Cleveland Browns Xmas.

No offense, of course.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:There it is, a little late but present none the less, the "you gotta be a playa" take from Lead. Sometimes I think he thinks he sayin something slick to a can of oil. Christ I think I've heard that take more than I have heard the 12 Days of Cleveland Browns Xmas.

No offense, of course.

There'd be less "playa" comments if people stopped claiming Jack Hanahan was one. Or that a platoon of Brantley and Shelly Duncan could give up production close to Cabrera, or that Andy Marte was gonna hit cause his AA stats said so, or......it would be a good idea to throw Josh Tomlin in the closers roll for the post season.

Dude anyone can close out one game, ANYONE. You go in with an 85% chance of doing so before throwing your first warm up pitch in the pen. But we get it, you want the best players in the world available to do so, you and every other person on the planet.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:Dude anyone can close out one game, ANYONE. You go in with an 85% chance of doing so before throwing your first warm up pitch in the pen. But we get it, you want the best players in the world available to do so, you and every other person on the planet.

Not really sure what you got out of my post other than for some reason being irritated by my use of the word playa.

In paragraph four I listed reasons why I would not want Josh Tomlin anywhere near the closers role - which, I kinda thought was the point of my post, in responding to Books.

Had zero to do with the value of the closers role, or why it'd be better to have the greatest pitch on GGE in that role.

So, if you thought I wrote a post simply claiming "hey, put a really, really good player in the closers role, cause that'd be better than a mediocre or poor one," I suggest you, or anyone, read it again.

Christ, I'd understand if someone took issue with my reasons should they be a "Josh Tomlin, closer honk." Don't really understand taking issue with the "playa," or nonsense parts of the post.

And to be clear, the part about an intoxicated Chris Perez throwing lefty....that wasn't serious.

Last edited by leadpipe on Fri Sep 27, 2013 9:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Injuries are the problem with both Pestano and Perez. Perez is really too good to be giving up this many runs.

"Whether he'll say it or not, he probably hasn't been healthy this entire year," Masterson said. "It's unfortunate. He's pushing through whatever he's got going. It's admirable. But he wouldn't tell us anything. He's that type of guy. He's going to do his thing and get after it, and if he doesn't do it, he accepts how it comes."

motherscratcher wrote:If Masterson can start, that's what he should be doing.

In a 7 game series with 2 starts he wold pitch what? 14-15 innings give or take? Out of the pen he pitches...maybe 4-5?

Exactly.

Look, I understand the pitching staff was a pleasant suprise....but you got no room for your ace?

By the way, as with the "Masterson won't be on the playoff roster" take....do you honestly think they are gonna F with the guy. You think Francona is gonna explain to the fellas that their horse, one of their leaders is off the roster. You think the organization essentially tells the guy to F himself?

Same thing here, Masterson says he's ready to start, that's where he'll be. You would think earning it and being the best pitcher on the squad would be enough.

In a series, Masterson with the ball for 16 innings is better than 3, and having the other 13 filled with a worse pitcher.

It's perfectly reasonable to use Masty in the pen for a game, seeing as he needs work and that we might need all arms on deck to get in. Gotta get in first before you worry about how many games he starts in a series.

But if we get a series then um duh, yeah he needs to start when he can.

Criminals in this town used to believe in things...honor, respect."I heard your dog is sick, so bought you this shovel"

FUDU wrote:It's perfectly reasonable to use Masty in the pen for a game, seeing as he needs work and that we might need all arms on deck to get in. Gotta get in first before you worry about how many games he starts in a series.

But if we get a series then um duh, yeah he needs to start when he can.

I found a time machine, and I thought about getting Jose Mesa or Doug Jones in their respective primes to come close out our games, but then I thought about it some more and just went to some Led Zeppelin concerts in the mid-70s and scored some mad 70's tail instead.

Has it been stated Salazar is starting Wednesday if they get there? If they win today and Texas loses and they clinch a spot...will they still start Jimenez Sunday or save him for Wednesday? (I can't believe I'm actually typing "saving Jimenez for an important start".) Or is getting home field extremely important (not sure it is....both road teams won the play in game last year) and they start Jimenez Sunday regardless?

As of right now the Tribe is alone at the top of the WC list. If the Jays end up sweeping the Rays (yup, they've won both game so far) I'm going to learn "O, Canada"! All the Tribe needs to do is win baby WIN.

I've tried 'em all, I really have, and the only church that truly feeds the soul, day in, day out, is the Church of Baseball.~~~Annie Savoy-"Bull Durham"

Masterson and Kluber getting hurt messed with what I was hoping for: using Kazmir and Salazar in the bullpen during a playoff run. Kluber was pitching well enough to start a Game 3 of a series before the injury. And Kazmir and Salazar would've been lights out in a piggyback role in the pen.

motherscratcher wrote:Hey Tripods, I can't find the post but you alluded to Reynolds being shipped because he was a clubhouse problem when his PT dwindled. I hadn't heard that. Anything specific on that?

I don't remember anything specifically, but I do remember it being said that he was unhappy with his lack of playing time, so I imagine that made him awkward to be around. As we've seen, Tito's tried to play everybody to keep them fresh. Reynolds wasn't seeing any at bats at all. Warranted, but I'm sure he was unhappy.

A God Damn dead man would understand that if a minor league bus in any city took a real sharp right turn, a Zack McCalister would likely fall out. - Lead Pipe

Reynolds and Meyers were both becoming big time distractions in the clubhouse. Reynolds especially. Tito alluded to it a couple of times to reporters, saying things like "Mark has to learn how to handle his role on the team." Word was it was pretty bad though, especially when he was replaced for a pinch hitter late in games.

If you go back and look at the walkoff celebrations from his last month or so with the team, you'll see he was nowhere to be found.

You cannot help men permanently by doing for them what they could and should do for themselves-----Abe Lincoln

Let me tell you, if any of you douchebag empty headed stuffed suit nanny politicians tries to fuck with my bacon, I’m going after you like a crazed chimpanzee on bath salts. -----Lars